On Nov 30, 2004, at 11:08 AM, Devine, James wrote:
Doesn't (didn't?) Alex Cockburn really like Bruce Anderson?
So does Dan O'Neill. Like Cockburn he (rightfully) wants to get printed. There's plenty of room in journalism for inflammatory shots. I disagree with Anderson's lack of journalistic care and his willingness to inflame to sell, regardless of the truth or the social and political ramifications. No argumentum ad hominem can relieve him of a higher journalistic responsibility.
It's the damndest conundrum, this. Rare indeed are the "responsible" editors who would run either Cockburn or O'Neill. But because both are controversial, "insidiots" like Anderson run them right along with garbage. Any truth that pops out is incidental and not meant.
Anderson was in a position to shine light on the timber wars in his community but he elected to fan the flames instead.
Dan
